Unfortunately, because no Jill Stein supporters came in to my defense or do so much as intervene to cool down and bring the situation under control (this is an example of how negative things get attention), & this was exactly the type of problem that I was originally talking about.
The individual who attacked me seemed to have a pretty clear violent double-standard, as you can see in the screenshots (I'm going to let the pictures say things for themselves).
I honestly don't know if this person is for real or if they're a shill or what, becuase I cannot believe the type of reactions and treatment I got.
This is an example of how polarized Americans have become in politics;
1. Humans are usually pack animals. Many of us actually want to be a member or part of a group of some sort;
For more details, watch the video below. I'm not doing this in opposition to the FSP and it may look like it's about a different issue, but in reality, this issue is very similar to what I'm facing now.
(Also read When is violence justified? | StormCloudsGathering & Six Reasons Libertarians Should Reject the Non-Aggression Principle, the latter article of which gives detail, insight, & information not presented in the former article.)
False dichotomies & the guilt by association fallacy.
One of the tactics used by the individual who attacked me (I'm not naming their name becuase this is not intended to be a personal attack) was guilt by association, & he asserted that libertarianism was a fascist ideology seemingly solely on the basis that Murray Rothbard questioned the holocaust and that Ludwig von Mises had influence on the libertarian movement in the 20th century.
A big fallacy on the part of the individual who attacked me was the "all or nothing" type of absolutism. They clearly assumed that I was all-around pro-privatisation & deregulation, even though anyone who has really talked to me & looked at my content would know otherwise. Heck, you can still be a libertarian on other issues without supporting complete privatisation & deregulation (I myself want public roads, emergency services, definately government printed money, etc).
The type of "all or nothing" logic that the individual used is like putting in some the strongest glass shattering subwoofers that money could buy in your car & having the volume controls being either 100% or off with no other setting whatsoever. What I mean by that is that there is no gray area or middle ground.
If you believe in the non-agression principle at heart (not that I advocate following it purely or without question), then in a sense, you are a libertarian becuase you wouldn't use force against others if they respect the rights of others, even if you disagree on say, economics.
Another thing that I'd like to address is how the person who attacked me can actually be, in a sense, similar to their arch enemies in the sense that they use aggression & violence against those who disagree with them & outside of defense.
It has already been demonstrated that Neo-Nazis & Social Justice Warriors (not calling this individual one, which would be wrong in this case) can sound pretty similar if you take a few specific words out.
Not to mention how someone can get onto how socialism is tied with communism (there IS a difference!) & how anarcho-socialist is an oxymoron.
What is definitely contradicting about the person is their claim to be an anarcho-socialist, but their belifs about how to treat those who disagree with them contradicts what it means to be an anarchist; let people do as they please.
And things can actually be deadly if these types of characters ever get real power;
Yet another problem I have is that they imply believing that all types of libertarians are the same, when in reality, there are not.
And it's a complete myth that libertarianism is inherently right (or left) wing.
Americans seem love being divisive in politics, & seem to flaunt & embrace ultra-partisan labels.
Here are a few examples in memes: